Abstract
Stimulated by Kenneth Pimple’s “Six Domains of Research Ethic”, this paper examines four aspects of the responsible conduct of research and scientists’ social responsibilities. I argue that scholars and decision-makers concerned with the responsible conduct of research should take notice of the rapidly growing body of scholarship on the social organization of science and the behavior of scientists, integrating that work with ethical principles. Of particular concern are the increasing heterogeneity and interdisciplinary of research, the ambivalences in the practice of peer review, the social tensions of research life, and the heightened concern for social and economic returns from federal research investments. In all, the paper echoes and develops Pimple’s call for integrative thinking about the responsible conduct of research.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pimple, K.D. (2002) Pimple, K.D. (2002) Six domains of research ethics: A heuristic framework for the responsible conduct of research, Science and Engineering Ethics 8: 191–205.
Hackett, E. J. (1994) A Social Control Perspective on Scientific Misconduct, The Journal of Higher Education 65 (3): 242–260.
Chubin, D. E. and Hackett, E. J. (1990) Peerless Science: Peer Review and U.S. Science Policy, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hackett, E.J. Four observations about “six domains of research ethics”. SCI ENG ETHICS 8, 211–214 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-002-0020-7
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-002-0020-7